Does the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) require reasonable accommodations be made? (Yes; and the Admin Code allows for the Written Exam to be administered orally to those that have difficulties with written exams. For those with balance/mobility problems, the Range Proficiency Exam may be administered while sitting or in a wheelchair*).

- Is there a 'reasonable' accommodation that can be made for administering the Range Proficiency Exam to a blind person? (Perhaps; blind persons typically use their other senses to make up for lack of sight. Allowing them to 'feel' the target dimensions so they understand the target area/scoring zones; placing the target directly in front of them at the required distances & ensuring they are oriented at the target; placing a buzzer or other sound emitter at the target for them to orient on; etc are not unreasonable accommodations, & are not explicitly prohibited by Admin Code).

Must they be held to the same scoring standards as anyone else? (Yes, until a law or Admin Code rule is created that allows otherwise).

The above is my objective look at it, minus emotions & void of the obvious issues that others have already expressed regarding target identification out in public, etc. Until a law or Admin rule is created, there's nothing expressly prohibiting it.

(*) The part about wheelchairs isn't specifically addressed in the Admin Code; I asked this question to SGT Bamsch & (I forget her name) at an instructor renewal class awhile back; they acknowledged it would fall under a 'reasonable' accommodation.

Here's about as close as the LTC-16 gets to the topic. And I could have sworn there was something about a person being able to request the revocation (or suggest) of a license. I can't find it so maybe I'm making it up.

GC §411.188. HANDGUN PROFICIENCY REQUIREMENT.
(k) A qualified handgun instructor may submit to the department a written recommendation for disapproval of the application for a license or modification of a license, accompanied by an affidavit stating personal knowledge or naming persons with personal knowledge of facts that lead the instructor to believe that an applicant does not possess the required handgun proficiency. The department may use a written recommendation submitted under this subsection as the basis for denial of a license only if the department determines that the recommendation is made in good faith and is supported by a preponderance of the evidence. The department shall make a determination under this subsection not later than the 45th day after the date the department receives the written recommendation. The 60-day period in which the department must take action under Section 411.177(b) is extended one day for each day a determination is pending under this subsection.

HSC §12.092. MEDICAL ADVISORY BOARD; BOARD MEMBERS
(b) The medical advisory board shall assist the Department of Public Safety of the State of Texas in determining whether:
(1) an applicant for a driver’s license or a license holder is capable of safely operating a motor vehicle; or
(2) an applicant for or holder of a license to carry a handgun under the authority of Subchapter H, Chapter 411, Government Code, or an applicant for or holder of a commission as a security officer under Chapter 1702, Occupations Code, is capable of exercising sound judgment with respect to the proper use and storage of a handgun.

HSC §12.095. BOARD PANELS; POWERS AND DUTIES
(e) The panel may require the applicant or license holder to undergo a medical or other examination at the applicant’s or holder’s expense. A person who conducts an examination under this subsection may be compelled to testify before the panel and in any subsequent proceedings under Subchapter H, Chapter 411, Government Code, or Subchapter N, Chapter 521, Transportation Code, as applicable, concerning the person’s observations and findings.

Putting on my devil's advocate hat for a moment...
With the dems/progressives already claiming "it's easier to buy a gun than a book", I'd really cringe if they were literally able to say "a blind person can get a Texas LTC" and have a precedent to point to. Of course, there are literary precedents for blind gun ownership for defensive use. A Robert Louis Stevenson book (can't remember off hand which one) and the guy mentioned by 'Swede' the gunsmith in the John Wayne movie "El Dorado". As I recall, things didn't end well for either blind marksman.......

JustSomeOldGuy wrote:Putting on my devil's advocate hat for a moment...

Start cringing, it already has happened. There is at least one "totally blind" (i.e., can only see light/dark out of one eye) individual who possesses concealed carry permits (or the individual state's equivalent name) from approximately 8 states, including Texas (thus, precedent). This individual also has passed the training requirements for an IL permit, and we already know how 2A friendly Chicago is!

JustSomeOldGuy wrote:With the dems/progressives already claiming "it's easier to buy a gun than a book", I'd really cringe if they were literally able to say "a blind person can get a Texas LTC" and have a precedent to point to.

JustSomeOldGuy wrote: Of course, there are literary precedents for blind gun ownership for defensive use. A Robert Louis Stevenson book (can't remember off hand which one) and the guy mentioned by 'Swede' the gunsmith in the John Wayne movie "El Dorado". As I recall, things didn't end well for either blind marksman.......

Well, perhaps we should discuss real life, instead of "literary precedents". On buckeyesforconcealedcarry.com there is a webpage devoted to "Pete's Story":

Pete's Story
by Buckeyes for Concealed Carry on Campus
This piece about a friend of State Director Michael Newbern is the second in a series on how campus firearms bans effectively make students, faculty, and staff vulnerable off-campus.
Pete and I were first introduced earlier this year by a mutual friend, Linda Walker and have since become good friends. Pete is a pretty nice guy. He's really into guns and so mi. We go shooting and to gun shows from time to time. We usually have lunch together about once a week.
He's also really into computers. He's into computers so much that he works in Information Technology at Ohio State University. Although he's a small guy, he's not your typical run of the mill nerd.

my concern with saying no, is the ADA. If accommodations can be made and he can pass within the ADA, then this needs to be done. If he can't do it, then that's on him.
We all know that the handicapped are targets and he has the right to defend himself.
I would not want to be the test case if the DPS says straight out NO, because someone will definitely take them to court under the ADA and will lose.

edited to add: my daughter is studying sign at SAC, I've learned a lot about the ADA over the last couple of years.

~Tracy
Gun control is what you talk about when you don't want to talk about the truth ~ Colion Noir

As an instructor, we have the right to refuse to teach someone, correct? Are there limitations on the "why" for that refusal?

Personally, I would not feel safe trying to administer the shooting proficiency to a blind person I did not know unless they were the only student, we were the only ones at the range, and someone I knew and trusted was with them any time I was down range (e.g. moving a target, etc.). In other words, there would have to be someone with them 100% of the time to control the firearm.

If the blind person was someone I knew and trusted, I would relax that some, but would still take added precautions. Too much risk is involved.

Though the following could directed at a public entity (i.e., Title II), I expect that there would be an equivalent section of the ADA (i.e., Title III https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Americans ... acilities)) that could be directed against a business (i.e., a LTC instructor):

The assertion of a protected civil right often challenges societal beliefs and attitudes. This is why the Americans with Disabilities Act sets a very high bar as to when a person with a disability can be legally denied the “services, programs, or activities” of a public entity based on a “direct threat to the health or safety of others.” According to the Department of Justice Title II Technical Assistance Manual, the “public entity must ensure that its safety requirements are based on real risks, not on speculation, stereotypes, or generalizations about individuals with disabilities.”

“In determining whether an individual poses a direct threat to the health or safety of others, a public entity must make an individualized assessment, based on reasonable judgment that relies on current medical knowledge or on the best available objective evidence, to ascertain: the nature, duration, and severity of the risk; the probability that the potential injury will actually occur; and whether reasonable modifications of policies, practices, or procedures or the provision of auxiliary aids or services will mitigate the risk.”

The requirements of the Americans with Disabilities Act to conduct an individualized assessment are required by 28 CFR § 35.139(b).

Persons with disabilities have a long history of being discriminated against based on a mistaken belief that individuals with disabilities somehow pose a threat of harm to self or others. For this reason, Congress included language in the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) that established a very high threshold that a covered entity must meet to show that an individual with a disability presents a “direct threat” of harm.

Consult an attorney for a formal legal opinion, but it could be argued that an LTC instructor be prepared to prove (beyond the very high threshold) why a specific blind individual (i.e., the potential student, in the original post), as opposed to the "speculation, stereotypes, or generalizations" of "the blind" in general, would be a threat to themselves or others, if an LTC instructor wishes to deny a specific blind person access to LTC training which is available to the public.

In regards to the original post:
If you claim your company or as an individual providing service to public you do not have to teach the student and/ or provide and exam. If you claim to be ADA compliant it is a different story and then you have to provide the test in braille or oral format. As far as the shooting test goes I don't think there is a guideline at ADA (see hhtps://www.ada.gov).

I am legally blind, obtained my CHL long before I had a complete vision loss due to west Nile fever and the side effects of it in 2012. All doctors said my eyesight will not return because of the damage done to the optical nerves. I had 105 deg F fever for over 6 days, menegitis and encyphalitis which caused vision loss, 60 pound weight loss in 6 days and a series of other symptoms.
At the beginning of 2013 I retained a minor spot of vision in my left eye which gradualy improved over the years and as of today I can do almost everything required for an autonomous live with the exception of driving in public but that may work as well sometimes in the future.
When I was determined disabled I received the status "long term disability" not permanent disabled.
I also renewed my DL and LTC once since I had my vision loss. I went to the range after 2 years for the first time and have no issue passing the minimum score if ambient lighting permits.
I am also aware of the law, do not carry in public to avoid any problems with the law but given the fact my vision is still improving I renewed anyway.
In regards to home defense, I have homogenous lighting throughout my home in order to acomodaste for my vision. My primary alarm system comes on 4 legs and he won't miss anything suspicious.

In regards to a completely blind person I would not recomand a gun at all. I went through that state and all I can say is that I had a problem finding the restroom on time until I learned how to deal with about anything without vision at all. If that blind person needs protection I'd suggest a dog.

To the subject again:
If that person needs help he is welcome to contact me via P.M. on this forum, I have some good experience and knowledge how to improve a humans vision. I learned swimming because I was thrown in the pond.

ninjabread wrote:If the blind student is a veteran, they don't have to take the shooting test. GC §411.1881

An interesting twist on the subject, with renewal classes no longer required, is whether there's any grounds to deny LTC renewal if somebody goes blind after getting their license.

True to a point, they do not have to take the LTC shooting proficiency, BUT they still have to document proficiency, they just don't have to do it with the LTC instructor. I had a police officer a few years ago that told me that he was going to use his quals under Tcole. He asked me how to do that, I told him that I was not sure since it did not involve or effect my class, I just gave him a CHL 100 that had the shooting proficiency X'd out. He called a couple of days later and asked if we could meet for shooting proficiency, as it would be easier to shoot 50 rounds with me than jump through all the hoops required. We did, he passed with a 250 score and I gave him an additional CHL 100 that just had the proficiency part filled. I have now idea what hoops he was talking about or if it has changed.

Texas LTC Instructor, NRA pistol instructor, RSO, NRA Endowment Life , TSRA, Glock enthusiast (tho I have others)
Knowledge is knowing a tomato is a fruit, wisdom is knowing not to add it to a fruit salad.

You will never know another me, this could be good or not so good, but it is still true.